The sim that CA built!

[eraser_tr 29]

Some food for thought, a little bit of technical details that would be great to utilize in a sim too.

 

A few ideas struck me not long ago doing moddable sims in different eras and genres. What if a common engine could be made that could service flight, naval and ground warfare in a fairly modular way?

 

It was brought about by looking around for a modern tank sim. Not just a combat game with tanks, but something like a TW esque tank sim, moddable and cutomizable for anywhere between WWI and future. Then it drifted to naval warfare after getting Silent hunter 3 and enjoying it, but wanting to take part in surface warfare with battleships in the same way.

 

A specific I think would be amazing for scenery in flight, or any sims: SpeedtreeRT It's been used in alot of games, from very high detailed fantasy like Oblivion, to RTS like world in conflict.

 

Very flexible and scalable in detail, everything from 2d billboards (easy to display in mass from the air) to low poly 3d and very high poly 3d all from the same piece of data.

 

TW's level of complexity in controling things like avionics is in a great spot. I'd love more complexity and ability under the hood, but it shouldn't be hard to operate like with F4AF

 

Since any TW involvment is out it's kind of moot, but a specific upgrade to the engine would be in its texture use. A newer format like dds would be less costly on disk space while maintaining excellent quality.

[Apocal 0]

What do you think?

 

I think the place you posed this question has greatly influenced the result.

[column5 63]

I think the place you posed this question has greatly influenced the result.

 

That's why its the sim that CA built!

[+streakeagle 871]

Where SFP1 failed (besides the early release) was the fictional terrain/countries.

The map and campaigns should have been historical: either Israel or Vietnam.

TK could have limited the scope to USAF to avoid carriers for a Vietnam release or limited the time frame to 1973 to avoid F-15/F-16 aircraft for an Israel release.

The F-104G should have been in a Europe release.

 

If the community is going to build a sim, TK's experience should act as a guide: break the game into multiple releases that build up the game engine.

Each release should add something significant, perhaps 1 aircraft per release including support for any unique avionics/weapon systems.

The LOMAC people have figured this out, but I have zero interest in the first aircraft they are releasing, and only a passing interest in any of the aircraft planned over the immediate future.

 

Targetware represents the best chance the community has ever had of creating their own combat flight sims.

I haven't tried Targetware in a while, but I have never cared that much for the releases I have tried over the years.

For me, it is a failure. I would rather pay $15 per month to fly Aces High than any other WW2 sim to date much less the free Target Tobruk.

I also get much more enjoyment out of SFP1's Korean War mod or MiG Alley than I can from the Target Korea.

 

Having a large number of us pool our money together to contract TK to enhance the SFP1 game engine to suit our needs is a great idea.

But maybe, instead of gathering a huge lump sum and making a whole new sim, we should award smaller much more affordable contracts for specific enhancements.

A specific enhancement would be made available for free to the original contractors and sold as an addon to everyone else.

TK would need to set a price/schedule for each of the different additions desired, then the pledged money would have to hit the magic number before money was collected and work started.

Whichever package hit the magic number first would be completed and released before the next package was charged/started.

Packages would be divided up into categories similar to those listed here, i.e. detailed carrier ops, multiplayer expansion, more detailed campaigns, smarter/more realistic AI, individual high-fidelity aircraft cockpits (i.e having a Falcon 4.0 level clickable 3d pit for the F-4E would be one package, the F-4B would be a separate package), individual high-fidelity aircraft flgiht models (a good FM can take longer than building and entire 3d model with cockpit!), etc.

 

Could such a model ever work?

Would there ever be enough pledges to any one package to fund it?

Would TK be able to sell the resulting work to anyone other than the original contractors and make a decent living?

[Caesar 305]

Well, I think historic realism is a pretty good idea personally. If you wanted to you could cover from say 1965-1985, that'd get the Vietnam War along with some of the other conflicts that happened in the timespan shortly after (Med, Middle East) and maybe a limited selection of a/c. F-4 won, so there's your backbone, but keep maybe 3 allied and 3 OPFOR kind of like LOMAC for a little versitility? Just a suggestion.

[eraser_tr 29]

Well, he kind of already said there would be no TW involvement, so anything would have to be a new engine. Unless he didn't mind licensing the current engine out and ending involvment there. That would be great as alot of backwards compatability could be maintained, which means aircraft and everything else available would be quite plentiful.

 

Terrain does need a 100% overhaul to the point where compatability wouldn't be possible, worth it or wanted. One thing that would definitely get my funding would be an intuitive WYSISYG object placement for both terrain and mission creation. If we could hand drop in map details visually, the TW sims would look exponentially better. The aircraft and most ground objects are excellent already, it's just a mostly dead environment that makes them seem a bit dated.

 

I wonder if TK would agree to something like we licensed the engine to do this sim and allowed him to use code improvements in his games free of charge. I've always thought a close partnership between a large modding community and developer would create an ideal and comprehensive game.

 

Historical plausibility I think is better than historical realism. Not to nuts about made up countries like Dhimar and Paran (except for their roundels and paint schemes, which I rather like) But fake conflicts rooted in some reality are fun.

Edited February 16, 2008 by eraser_tr

[+Timmy 1]

One thing that would definitely get my funding would be an intuitive WYSISYG object placement for both terrain and mission creation. If we could hand drop in map details visually, the TW sims would look exponentially better. The aircraft and most ground objects are excellent already, it's just a mostly dead environment that makes them seem a bit dated.

 

What he said...

 

I suppose I'm in the minority - but most of my time is spent in my own campaigns between two completely fictional forces. I lose immersion when I've got 35 kills over North Vietnam. What I really love is the ability to mod this sim to my own tastes. I really wish I could create a completely fictional map with fictional target placements without having to have the Rain Man's skill set that the Map Editor and target placement seems to require - no offense Kev...

[Apocal 0]

That's why its the sim that CA built!

 

No, I mean you put this in the WoE/WoV/P1 forum. Did you honestly expect any different result than that you received?

 

I know this isn't true across the board by any means, but I don't post to the forums of games I don't enjoy. And while there are things in any game I wish were improved or changed, if I think it has serious, fundamental flaws, I won't enjoy it.

[column5 63]

No, I mean you put this in the WoE/WoV/P1 forum. Did you honestly expect any different result than that you received?

 

I know this isn't true across the board by any means, but I don't post to the forums of games I don't enjoy. And while there are things in any game I wish were improved or changed, if I think it has serious, fundamental flaws, I won't enjoy it.

 

That's cool, everyone has their own preferences.

[+Fates 63]

I would like to see the old terrain of JanesUSAF come back....maybe in a sim centered around REDFLAG hosted at Nellis.

[MigBuster 2,884]

If the community is going to build a sim, TK's experience should act as a guide: break the game into multiple releases that build up the game engine.

Each release should add something significant, perhaps 1 aircraft per release including support for any unique avionics/weapon systems.

The LOMAC people have figured this out, but I have zero interest in the first aircraft they are releasing, and only a passing interest in any of the aircraft planned over the immediate future.

 

Targetware represents the best chance the community has ever had of creating their own combat flight sims.

I haven't tried Targetware in a while, but I have never cared that much for the releases I have tried over the years.

For me, it is a failure. I would rather pay $15 per month to fly Aces High than any other WW2 sim to date much less the free Target Tobruk.

I also get much more enjoyment out of SFP1's Korean War mod or MiG Alley than I can from the Target Korea.

 

Having a large number of us pool our money together to contract TK to enhance the SFP1 game engine to suit our needs is a great idea.

But maybe, instead of gathering a huge lump sum and making a whole new sim, we should award smaller much more affordable contracts for specific enhancements.

A specific enhancement would be made available for free to the original contractors and sold as an addon to everyone else.

TK would need to set a price/schedule for each of the different additions desired, then the pledged money would have to hit the magic number before money was collected and work started.

Whichever package hit the magic number first would be completed and released before the next package was charged/started.

Packages would be divided up into categories similar to those listed here, i.e. detailed carrier ops, multiplayer expansion, more detailed campaigns, smarter/more realistic AI, individual high-fidelity aircraft cockpits (i.e having a Falcon 4.0 level clickable 3d pit for the F-4E would be one package, the F-4B would be a separate package), individual high-fidelity aircraft flgiht models (a good FM can take longer than building and entire 3d model with cockpit!), etc.

 

Could such a model ever work?

Would there ever be enough pledges to any one package to fund it?

Would TK be able to sell the resulting work to anyone other than the original contractors and make a decent living?

 

 

Expansion packs are a good way to go - a small manageable and totally defined project each time - ( kind of what YAP are doing in a way) - but here the goal would be to get engine game changes that can't currently be done.

[MigBuster 2,884]

Actually when I say small - they would still probably considerable in time and effort required - take "realistic carrier ops" by itself for example.

 

forget 2 weeks - 2 years!

[eraser_tr 29]

I would like to see the old terrain of JanesUSAF come back....maybe in a sim centered around REDFLAG hosted at Nellis.

 

A real training Red Flag at nellis would be awesome, maybe even a requirment before flying combat missions. But there would absolutely have to be real combat or people would get bored fairly quickly.

 

Expansion packs are definitely a way to go. Just look at the improvment of the FE expansion.

 

But what exactly is meant by detailed carrier ops? How much would be purely aesthetic compared to having a real impact on the game?

[Viggen 644]

But what exactly is meant by detailed carrier ops? How much would be purely aesthetic compared to having a real impact on the game?

 

Probably haveing planes on the carrier, having the cataput, taxi, fire, fuel, weapons guys all running around, Tower, and tons of AA defenses.

[sparkomatic 7]

No, I mean you put this in the WoE/WoV/P1 forum. Did you honestly expect any different result than that you received?

 

I know this isn't true across the board by any means, but I don't post to the forums of games I don't enjoy. And while there are things in any game I wish were improved or changed, if I think it has serious, fundamental flaws, I won't enjoy it.

 

 

 

Man...they call me a cranky fellow...dude what up?